Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I'd like to welcome the committee to P.E.I.
I think from the witnesses you've heard, you should know that agriculture is the number one industry here, and what happens in agriculture, positive or negative, flows in the same way throughout Prince Edward Island society. There is no question about that.
Because we had about an hour to spare, we did take a drive out, so we've seen a potato wart field and the restrictions that are on that particular field.
Anyway, I have a few questions, and I thank you all for coming and laying out your presentations.
Across the board, there seems to be a view wherever we go that companion programs are necessary, that there needs to be regional flexibility. I'd ask you to quickly comment on that, because it hasn't been the direction of governments to go with companion programs. We've been moving away from that. Does that need to be rethought, and do we need to reinstate flexibility for companion programs?
Secondly, I think Scott, or it might have been John, mentioned the figure of $1.5 billion—you can correct me on that figure if I'm wrong—just on food safety and traceability alone. The U.S. is a lot more strategic in that area than we are. They develop programming that's green, whether it's environmental, food safety, or whatever. What we do is seen as a subsidy.
Maybe the potato board guys could tell us what it costs for CFIA inspections in this province. If that was paid for, it would make a huge difference. It's a food safety issue. It shouldn't be a farm cost. If the federal government would take responsibility for some of that programming in that area of cost, it would help the bottom line and wouldn't be seen as a farm subsidy.
The third point I'd like you to respond to is on the whole trade issue that a few folks have brought up, and we've heard it elsewhere. I don't know why, but in Canada...and I've worked on this Russia potato thing; there is no reason that is not settled. Do we need to be looking at something like a quick response team that has certain individuals from agriculture, from trade, and from wherever else committed to doing nothing but dealing with our trade problems so that they're on it, right off the bat, and if they had to go to Russia to deal with it—the CFIA, and so on and so forth—it would be done with quickly? Trade is our bottom line in terms of selling these products. When we produce them and can't sell them, it's no good to anyone.
Those are my three questions.